IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

The impact of weights on the quality of agricultural producers' multicriteria decision models


  • Agata Sielska


Decisions regarding agricultural production involve multiple goals. A multicriteria approach allows decision makers to consider more aspects of the decision scenario, although it also leads to other problems, such as difficulties with the selection of goals or criteria, as well as assigning them appropriate weights. It is argued that not only do goals vary depending on the decision-makers’ socioeconomic features, but their relative importance changes as well. A simulation study has been conducted based on the Farm Accountancy Data Network (FADN) database. We use the distance-to-the-negative-solution maximization model. Seven sets of criteria and different sets of weights are considered. The main purpose of the study is to determine the impact of weights on the quality of the model. Quality is assessed by comparing the optimal and observed values of the decision variables. The results lead to the conclusion that the differences between the quality of various models are small.

Suggested Citation

  • Agata Sielska, 2015. "The impact of weights on the quality of agricultural producers' multicriteria decision models," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 25(4), pages 51-69.
  • Handle: RePEc:wut:journl:v:4:y:2015:p:51-69:id:1192
    DOI: 10.5277/ord150404

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL:
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Harman, Wyatte L. & Eidman, Vernon R. & Hatch, Roy E. & Claypool, P. L., 1972. "Relating Farm and Operator Characteristics to Multiple Goals," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(1), pages 215-220, July.
    2. F. Hutton Barron & Bruce E. Barrett, 1996. "Decision Quality Using Ranked Attribute Weights," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(11), pages 1515-1523, November.
    3. Kemfert, Claudia, 1998. "Estimated substitution elasticities of a nested CES production function approach for Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 249-264, June.
    4. Solano, C. & Leon, H. & Perez, E. & Herrero, M., 2001. "Characterising objective profiles of Costa Rican dairy farmers," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 153-179, March.
    5. Adewumi, M.O. & Omoresho, O.A., 2002. "An Analysis of Production Objectives of Small-Scale Rural Farming Households in Kwara State, Nigeria," Journal of Rural Development/Nongchon-Gyeongje, Korea Rural Economic Institute, vol. 25(4), December.
    6. Hayashi, Kiyotada, 2000. "Multicriteria analysis for agricultural resource management: A critical survey and future perspectives," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 486-500, April.
    7. van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Schoney, Richard A. & Hayward, Keith A., 1986. "An Alternative Approach To The Evaluation Of Goal Hierarchies Among Farmers," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 11(1), pages 1-10, July.
    8. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    9. Michael T. Wallace & Joan E. Moss, 2002. "Farmer Decision‐Making with Conflicting Goals: A Recursive Strategic Programming Analysis," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 82-100, March.
    10. Arne Henningsen & Géraldine Henningsen, 2011. "Econometric Estimation of the “Constant Elasticity of Substitution" Function in R: Package micEconCES," IFRO Working Paper 2011/9, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    11. Costa, F. P. & Rehman, T., 1999. "Exploring the link between farmers' objectives and the phenomenon of pasture degradation in the beef production systems of Central Brazil," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 135-146, August.
    12. Solano, C. & Leon, H. & Perez, E. & Herrero, M., 2001. "Who makes farming decisions? A study of Costa Rican dairy farmers," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 181-199, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Ewa Roszkowska, 2020. "The extention rank ordering criteria weighting methods in fuzzy enviroment," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 30(2), pages 91-114.
    2. Jadwiga Zarod, 2020. "Agricultural Production Planning Using a Multicriteria Optimization Model," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(4), pages 481-490.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stelios Rozakis & Alexandra Sintori & Konstantinos Tsiboukas, 2009. "Utility-derived Supply Function of Sheep Milk: The Case of Etoloakarnania, Greece," Working Papers 2009-11, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    2. Gomez-Limon, Jose Antonio & Berbel, Julio & Arriaza Balmón, Manuel, 2005. "MCDM Farm System Analysis for Public Management of Irrigated Agriculture," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24676, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Solano, C. & Leon, H. & Perez, E. & Tole, L. & Fawcett, R.H. & Herrero, M., 2006. "Using farmer decision-making profiles and managerial capacity as predictors of farm management and performance in Costa Rican dairy farms," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 88(2-3), pages 395-428, June.
    4. Sintori, Alexandra & Rozakis, Stelios & Tsiboukas, Kostas, 2009. "Multiple goals in farmers’ decision making: The case of sheep farming in Western Greece," 83rd Annual Conference, March 30 - April 1, 2009, Dublin, Ireland 51075, Agricultural Economics Society.
    5. Majid Ebrahimi & Hamid Nejadsoleymani & Mohammad Reza Mansouri Daneshvar, 2019. "Land suitability map and ecological carrying capacity for the recognition of touristic zones in the Kalat region, Iran: a multi-criteria analysis based on AHP and GIS," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 697-718, October.
    6. Michal Antoszewski, 2017. "Panel estimation of sectoral substitution elasticities for CES production functions," EcoMod2017 10160, EcoMod.
    7. Berkhout, Ezra D. & Schipper, Robert A. & Kuyvenhoven, Arie & Coulibaly, Ousmane, 2009. "Does heterogeneity in goals and preferences affect allocative and technical efficiency? A case study in Northern Nigeria," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 51676, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. B. Ahn & S. Choi, 2012. "Aggregation of ordinal data using ordered weighted averaging operator weights," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 201(1), pages 1-16, December.
    9. Hsu-Shih Shih, 2016. "A Mixed-Data Evaluation in Group TOPSIS with Differentiated Decision Power," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 537-565, May.
    10. María Carmen Carnero & Andrés Gómez, 2019. "Optimization of Decision Making in the Supply of Medicinal Gases Used in Health Care," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-31, May.
    11. Arora, Poonam & Bert, Federico & Podesta, Guillermo & Krantz, David H., 2015. "Ownership effect in the wild: Influence of land ownership on agribusiness goals and decisions in the Argentine Pampas," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 162-170.
    12. Jiménez, Antonio & Mateos, Alfonso & Sabio, Pilar, 2013. "Dominance intensity measure within fuzzy weight oriented MAUT: An application," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 397-405.
    13. Koesler, Simon & Schymura, Michael, 2012. "Substitution elasticities in a CES production framework: An empirical analysis on the basis of non-linear least squares estimations," ZEW Discussion Papers 12-007, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    14. Knoblach, Michael & Rößler, Martin & Zwerschke, Patrick, 2016. "The Elasticity of Factor Substitution Between Capital and Labor in the U.S. Economy: A Meta-Regression Analysis," CEPIE Working Papers 03/16, Technische Universität Dresden, Center of Public and International Economics (CEPIE).
    15. Kurka, Thomas & Blackwood, David, 2013. "Selection of MCA methods to support decision making for renewable energy developments," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 225-233.
    16. Rozakis, Stelios & Sintori, Alexandra & Tsiboukas, Konstantinos, 2012. "Estimating utility functions of Greek dairy sheep farmers: A multicriteria mathematical programming approach," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 13(1), pages 1-10.
    17. Paul E. Brockway & Matthew K. Heun & João Santos & John R. Barrett, 2017. "Energy-Extended CES Aggregate Production: Current Aspects of Their Specification and Econometric Estimation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-23, February.
    18. Bui, Linh & Hoang, Huyen & Bui, Hang, 2015. "Estimating the Constant Elasticity of Substitution Function of Rice Production.The case of Vietnam in 2012," MPRA Paper 71224, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Castillo-Valero, Juan S. & Sanchez-Garcia, Mercedes & Garcia-Cortijo, Mari Carmen, 2016. "Predicting grower choices in a regulated environment," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 20(1), November.
    20. Guitouni, Adel & Martel, Jean-Marc, 1998. "Tentative guidelines to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 501-521, September.


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wut:journl:v:4:y:2015:p:51-69:id:1192. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Adam Kasperski (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.